I'm a new addition to the forums so figured I'd stop on in and introduce myself.

I'm kind of a newcomer to the IT industry, had a 6 year stint in Law Enforcement and decided it was time to change careers. Eventually, I'd like to end up in the InfoSec realm, but in the meantime am learning the ropes on the technical side. Since ya know, ya can't know how to secure something if you don't know how it works. I'm pursuing an Associates in Information Security and will more than likely end up going after a Masters degree as well as get certifications to enhance my experience level.

Anyways, I stumbled across this forum while reading some security-related article or another and am hoping to learn something. So far, I've enjoyed spending time reading various posts between here and ha.ckers.org...Hopefully ya'll won't mind a noob askin' questions occassionally. :)

Sorry for the long post...I tend to write a lot and before I know it can end up writing a novel. Haha.

Hey, Cagekicker - I love watching those shows on the big house that are all the rage these days. Scary stuff. I'd be interested to hear your opinions on how well our laws are working (given how much much of the world's prison population we have than other countries). Not that I have much to say about the matter, but it's still interesting to hear an insider's perspective.

Anyway, you're welcome to stay as long as you like, and don't worry about newb questions. Out of the 2000 sla.ckers on the board we have nearly 1,000 lurkers, many of whom probably have all the same questions you do but are afraid to ask.

As long as you are watching documentary style shows, they can be relatively educational. I get asked all the time if "Oz" is how it really is...and every time I have to tell that person that "Oz" is like every other Hollywood creation...fake and designed to appeal to the masses by accentuating what the viewer would perceive to be exciting or dangerous. Yes, it's a dangerous job...I was assaulted twice in 6 years, whereas most Officer's can go an entire 20 year career without being assaulted.
1. An inmate didn't like the fact I caught him disregarding a direct order from me and decided that I was only punishing him because I wanted to take his good paying "job" in the prison away. So, by his rational...assaulting me was a good idea for trying to keep his job. (The irony of this...was the disciplinary ticket he received wouldn't have taken his job away from him at all. But, the street charges for the attempted assault did.)
2. An inmate got caught trying to escape, faked being drugged up on something and decided that seeing what it felt like to get taken down was a good idea and so he kicked a door while I was opening it to let him out, then started trying to kick and head-butt myself and another officer after we "contained" him against a wall. (Myself and another officer ran him out of the containment cell he was in and executed a perfect double-leg sweep, which made his face skid along the floor..haha.)

Oh, I can sum up how effective our laws are working in a relatively short paragraph.

They aren't. However, it's not the laws that are ineffective...it's the fact that you take a felon out of an environment, provide him with the means to better themselves through schooling and programs that are meant to remediate an area of "social weakness" in that person...and then once they've completed their sentence, they go right back into the environment that they came from, have the same social circles and are subjected to the exact same lifestyle that they were a part of prior to being tossed in prison. Only, this time...they have the possibility of being a smarter criminal because they've learned different things from other inmate's as well. The only way to effectively create a better society is to clean up the streets, educate the kids when they are young and provide them with the moral sense of what's right and wrong, and change the way "criminal society" works. A tall order and one that's not easily done considering there will always be lazy people looking for a way to make an easy dollar instead of getting out there and working like normal people do.

Edit #1: Fixed a spelling error

Edit #2: I should also note that the one's that don't come back and become a positive member of society are usually the one's that made a simple mistake and knew they had to pay for their choices. Either that, or they've done enough time(s) that they don't want to waste any more of their life behind bars.
I'd also like to add that sometimes, people become accustomed to life behind bars and they simply can't cut it out on the streets, so they ensure they spend most of their life where they are comfortable. In prison.

Hope that gives some sort of insight, feel free to ask me whatever you want as well. I don't mind.

--------------------------------------------------------
Regarding gun carry laws: I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by six...

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm just concerned that things like the war on drugs are only creating a prison population out of a good chunk of people who sincerely have not a mean bone in their body. I've known a lot of people who have done drugs and only a small handful I would say should be locked up and it's rarely about the drugs. Sure, violent criminals and sociopaths, I'm all on board with locking up, but the rest doesn't seem to matter much.

Like a patrol man can give people speeding tickets all day long. I challenge you to find an open stretch of road in the US that doesn't have at least one speeder a day on it - it's just not a deterrent and I'd even argue it's not a crime worth punishing. Most laws seem pretty senseless to me these days - punishing people for the wrong things and in the wrong ways. Whereas things like the guys in the eastern European countries that hacked into companies and traded. The SEC told them they are free to go because hacking doesn't fall under an insider's clause. Great. I talked with a guy from the DOJ last week and he himself was saying the laws we have are totally out of touch with the crimes we currently have.

Your contact at the DOJ is correct, in a lot of ways. Laws are created to address a given issue at a given time, but they are rarely reviewed to make sure that they are still needed or that they are relevant to today's laws.
For instance...in Phoenix, Arizona, you can't walk through a hotel lobby with spurs on. How often does that happen? This is a law that obviously dates back to days of old.

Different laws are in effect for different reasons. Some are to protect people other than just the one committing the violation, (traffic tickets for speeding, reckless driving, DUI, etc.) Other's are designed to send a signal to not just the offender, but to others.

For instance, moving violations have two purposes...protect other traveler's and to generate revenue for the city, county or state. The money that is generated from traffic tickets is generally used by the city to fund other needs such as maintenance on vehicles or equipment for police officers, etc. Contrary to popular belief though, most agencies do not have a requirement of their officers to maintain a certain amount of tickets each quarter.

Here's my outlook on the whole drug fiasco...People that get locked up for non-serious, non-violent crimes are a waste of tax payer dollars. If they are only USING drugs, give them probation, make them pay a fine, community service, etc. If they are DEALING/TRANSPORTING drugs, lock 'em up. Drug-related crimes aren't going to stop, not even if we legalize marijuana in the U.S. Reason being? Some people can't afford to buy their drugs as it is, so they rob, steal and cheat their way into getting money to buy it. Regardless of whether it's legal or not, your crimes aren't going to stop just because it's not against the law to purchase it or take it. This goes back to my "too lazy to get a job" theory from the earlier post.

Quote
"Most laws seem pretty senseless to me these days - punishing people for the wrong things and in the wrong ways. Whereas things like the guys in the eastern European countries that hacked into companies and traded. The SEC told them they are free to go because hacking doesn't fall under an insider's clause. Great."

Yes, but you know as well as I do that computer crimes is still a relatively new branch of law that has a crapload of "kinks in the armor", and getting multiple countries to agree to what is legal and what isn't is a logistical PITA and requires a lot of collaberation and political dealings. Not to mention that the countries that harbors computer criminals don't always have the funding available to investigate these crimes or don't view computer crimes in the same manner as others do.

--------------------------------------------------------
Regarding gun carry laws: I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by six...

Cagekicker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For instance...in Phoenix, Arizona, you can't walk
> through a hotel lobby with spurs on. How often
> does that happen? This is a law that obviously
> dates back to days of old.